It would be worthwhile to look into the way flat sections are fitted to a sphere. If a flat plane is warped to the spherical surface the linear segments between the corner vertices can diverge, producing gaps. If the flat sections are kept flat, so that the global surface is polygonal instead of perfectly spherical, then such gaps cannot occur.

This is somewhat analogous to the demand that the game screen be drawn on the gnomonic projection. Such a projection has straight lines everywhere drawn as straight, thus ensuring no gaps at the joining sides of polygons. No other projection can do this, because anywhere off axis (screen center) straight lines would be curved, with a failure to correctly fit polygonal sides; gaps or overlap would result.

To further impress the characteristics of the gnomonic projection, as a means to divine what might be causing the gaps we see thus far in this graphics extender...

In the real world, the straight line between any two points seen by the observer is a segment of a great circle. That's because the viewpoint and the two endpoints define a plane, and the viewpoint is always the center of the environment. This plane is thus a section of the larger plane that bisects a sphere centered on the observer.

The only projection which retains great circles as straight lines no matter where crossing the FoV is the gnomonic. As an indicator of its real world usefulness, note that this is the projection used for plotting the paths of meteors on the sky (no matter where they appear, the brief flight of a shower meteor is essentially straight, and thus represents a great circle segment.) Any other projection preserves the straightness of a great circle when passing through the center of projection (view center) only; everywhere else a straight line becomes curved.

Of course the polygons (triangles to be specific) of the terrain stay flat.I don't know - maybe we are talking past each other here.I have yet to look deeper into how gnomonic projection works.It's possible that, unknowingly, I'm already using it.

Am I missing something here? Latest build, dropped into my IL2 directory, making sure I'm using OpenGL and I have "perfect" mode enabled in conf.ini....

Nothing's different in-game. Is there something else I'm missing? I've looked at my il2 activator (came with this SAS install) and nothing is special there despite the fact that it's pointing towards my #SAS folder.

Am I missing something here? Latest build, dropped into my IL2 directory, making sure I'm using OpenGL and I have "perfect" mode enabled in conf.ini....

Nothing's different in-game. Is there something else I'm missing? I've looked at my il2 activator (came with this SAS install) and nothing is special there despite the fact that it's pointing towards my #SAS folder.

Steven uses TrackIR apparently.Map loading times vary a lot. Only few manage to get up within 4 seconds on my systems, il2ge or not."Playing a scenario" - no idea what you mean.Disabling il2ge is a piece of cake, just rename il2ge.dll to e.g. "-il2ge.dll" and make a comparative test.

If you still see noticeable differences, a log would be helpful.

Mike

Logged

Learn. Challenge. Improve. In loving memory of the times when I cared...

I'm guessing 'playing a scenario' is loading a mission from the QMB? I can confirm what Mike says map loading times vary greatly depending on its/detail size and static objects used on it. I have noticed no increase or decrease in map/mission loading times since using il2GE so the issue must be at your end?

I must say that I quite agree with GTAIV. The best selector, to my mind, was the 3.1.4 - very fast loading of the game, aircraft maps and objects, very smooth running. The 3.4.2 is surprizingly low in loading the game and still more when loading maps and objects - resulting sometimes in unexpected and ununderstood crashes (with strange logs as if the game "got mad" - I remember a case when loading a plane in Bat/#waw3., it crashed, the log showing as reason for the crash....the impossibility to load a tga referring to a ww1 plane totally unrelated with the plane I tried to load, and another case where the load "para" caused a crash, while in 3.1.4 this same aircaft run smoothy with this"para" loadout.). Loading a large number of objects seems especially low with this selector.

What's wrong with you Dreamk?Got up on the wrong side of the bed?Drank too much on todays X-Mas party?Or did you just think that it'd be time to post a bunch of complete bullshit in a totally unrelated thread?

Mike

Logged

Learn. Challenge. Improve. In loving memory of the times when I cared...